Jump to content

TNF: Chiefs vs. Patriots (Opening Day!!!)


TheVillain112

Poll  

110 members have voted

  1. 1. Who wins?

    • Patriots
      62
    • Chiefs
      48


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Revel8 said:

There's no doubt that Brady is an all-time great.  At the same time, he tends to get overrated due to the quality of Belichick's rebuild, coaching, and management.  Not to mention recency bias. 

Each NFL era is different for different positions, so judging the greatest of all time is almost impossible.  Especially where astonishing all-time greats like Otto Graham are concerned.

Pats had the weakest schedule in 2008 that Jets, Bills and Dolphins won 19 games against non-divisional teams, that is 4-6 more wins than average, and Matt had Moss.Meaning Pats were not even a playoff contender without Brady and Moss.

In first 4 games of 2016 season, Pats offens scored 81 pts, that is 324 pts in 16 games; Pats D allowed 1463 yd, that 5852 yds in 16 games, that is worse than Packers defense in 2016.

We all saw the quality of Brady's O-line against Giants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taking about overrated :
 
How on earth did Jared Cook not get half an ounce of credit for the last pass against Cowboys?
 
If it was Rodgers not Matt Ryan who had thrown the pass to Julio, Rodgers would have got all the credit, wouldn't he?
 
What is funny is that :
 
Quote

 

Rodgers had good game against Cowboys, he got all the credit.
 
Brady had good game against Steelers, Belichick got all the crediit, Not mention it was the exceptional ability of presnap reading Brady had that forced Steelers to drop 7 or 8, which made Steelers Pass rush ineffective. Are some fans so ignorant that they fail to see that?

 

 

Who is overrated? Obviously Rodgers is way more overated than Brady is, if Brady is overrated.
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Why do you guys talk to ztoa?

I didn't reply to anybody. Don't worry.

I just try to expose the stupidity and ignorance. Like using 11-5 to prove anything, actually 11-5 proved that Pats wouldn't even be a playoff contender without Brady and Moss.

You can think I am stupid, I don't care, this is internet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, ztoa said:

Brady is the #1 reason that Pats won 5. YOu never debunk the argument.

Without Belichick's rebuild, without Belichick starting Brady, without Belichick stocking that team with talent there would likely be no Super Bowls for the Patriots.

Brady threw 1 single TD the entire playoffs in 2001.  That team relied heavily on their defense (and kicker).  Same story with the 2003 team.  It's the same story with nearly all of their Super Bowl teams.

In fact, the Patriots have never won a Super Bowl without a top 10 scoring defense.  Nor should they be expected to.  It's not like Brady is some type of magical winner that can overcome his team's defensive deficiencies. 

This is also one reason why the Patriots are 14-6 without him.  That's a .700 record.  Belichick typically has that team so stacked and well-coached that they just keep on winning regardless if Brady is playing or not.

24 minutes ago, ztoa said:

For example, the only way to beat Falcons was to keep their offense off the fields. With Rodgers, Pats D would have allowed 35-40 pts.

 

The Falcons were prevented from scoring by the Patriots' #1 defense, along with questionable decisions by the Falcons offense.  With Rodgers and the #1 D in the NFL, the game may have been over for the Falcons by the 3rd quarter.

 

24 minutes ago, ztoa said:

The point here is that with Brady, your team had a chance to win; with Rodgers, you team wouldn't have a chance to win even with the mistakes Falcons made.

and no way Rodgers could score 24 pts with Deion Branch, 

 

Nonsensical conjecture.  I'd argue that Rodgers gives any team more a chance to win than Brady does. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Revel8 said:

Without Belichick's rebuild, without Belichick starting Brady, without Belichick stocking that team with talent there would likely be no Super Bowls for the Patriots.

Yes, it is BB who gave Brady the chance.

But to win SB, Pats had to score 24+ and game winning drives in 4 of them.

Rodgers was not able to do that,  Peyton was not able to do that.

BTW, in 31-45 loss to 49ers, Rodgers played only 22 min. Go figure.

There is no way a team can win SB with QB playing like that. Simple as that.

The sentiment you have is that you are waiting for spectacular plays, which is nearly impossible when opponent takes away your big ways, and it is unbelievably hard to score like 24+ without big plays, not mention Brady did it without great WR in some of the SB wins.

You just don't realize it. If you can't find big plays, you will think it is easy.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ztoa said:
Taking about overrated :
 
How on earth did Jared Cook not get half an ounce of credit for the last pass against Cowboys?
 
If it was Rodgers not Matt Ryan who had thrown the pass to Julio, Rodgers would have got all the credit, wouldn't he?
 
What is funny is that :
 

 

Who is overrated? Obviously Rodgers is way more overated than Brady is, if Brady is overrated.
 

 

I saw Cook get credit. 

Rodgers' got a lot of credit because, he's a QB, and because a lot of people still don't understand how great Rodgers is.  Rodgers literally drew that play up in the huddle.  It wasn't even in the playbook.  He then made the game-winning clutch throw that most QBs in NFL history can't make, but that Rodgers makes frequently. 

So many underrate Rodgers that they called the play things like 'the most clutch play' and the 'the best throw' ever.  But it's just a normal Rodgers play.  He makes the astonishing commonplace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Revel8 said:

Brady threw 1 single TD the entire playoffs in 2001.  That team relied heavily on their defense (and kicker).  Same story with the 2003 team.  It's the same story with nearly all of their Super Bowl teams.

You don't have to read :

 

At 6:34, the first play for Pats in SB, the first for Brady. Patriots were pinned in their own 3 yds. Watch Brady’s eyes and how Rams defender (who defended #80) moved. Brady looked to his right first after snap, which gave the defender the false sense and he dropped back, then Brady turned his head and got rid of the ball almost at the same time. The defender moved toward #80 after Brady turned the head, but it was too late, maybe not even 0.1 second later, which gave #80 the space to maneuver and broke the tackle.

At 2:00:50, Brady checked his option on his right, no one got open, and he turned his head to his left, without any delay, he threw the balls to his WR #21. A tiny bit of delay, his WR wouldn’t be able to get first down and wouldn’t be able to get out of bound.

At 2:01:35, that was a bad call, most QB would have hold the ball a bit longer and would have been sacked. Had Brady been sacked, Patriots would have to call timeout and mostly likely the game would have gone into overtime. But Brady threw the ball away, save the team from a bad call.

At 2:02:20, watch Rams #32 and the time Brady threw the ball. If Brady had thrown a tiny bit earlier, Rams #32 would be able to tackle #80 and keep him in bound; a tiny bit later, the other defender would tackle #80. Vinatieri would have kicked the ball from 55 yds instead of 48 yds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ztoa said:

Pats made to SB 7 times, how would Rodgers play in those 7 games?
First 3 times, don't tell me Rodgers could score more than 20 pts with Deion Branch or Troy Brown.
The last two, we already know he wouldn't have won a single one.
The 2nd one against Giants, he scored 13 pts plus a TD in garbage time against that Giants, don't tell me Rodgers could score more than Brady with injured Gronk.
The 1st one against Giants, please, that line was even worse than the one in 2nd SB, far worse.

So how on earth would Rodgers be able to accomplish anything with Pats ? Brady's line was penetrated within 3 seconds against great pass rushes.

************************************

The common excuse you have is defense (Packers D was not that bad except 2013).

High flying offense with quick exchange sides always leads to bad defense, like Pats defense between 2010 and 2013.

The only reason that Pats D didn't look so bad on total points during that period was because there were few high flying offense in AFCCG, otherwise Pats D would be in 20s during that periods.

A good OLine isn't a requirement for Rodgers like it is for Brady.  When the pocket collapses, he escapes and creates time for his receivers to get open.  

You're severely underrating Rodgers, severely overrating Brady, or both.  Rodgers has historically outperformed Brady statistically in the playoffs.

Playoff Stat—–Rodgers—Brady
QB Rating———–99.4——–89.0
Completion %-—63.5%——62.7%
PPG———---——28.75———26.7
YPA—————---—7.5———–6.9
TD %————---—-6.0%——–4.8%
INT %———---——1.7%——–2.3%

Rodgers also runs for many more yards, first downs, and TDs as well.  In fact, Rodgers did this against better quality defenses on average too.

 


Brady's playoff defenses have never once given up 40 or more points.  Rodgers' playoff defenses have already done that 3 times, in half the number of games games.  Brady's average defense has been ranked 7.6th in the NFL.  Rodgers' average defense has been ranked 14.6th.  This is one reason why Brady's D has never once given up 40 in a playoff game, while it's happened to Rodgers 3 times already.

 

Here's a graph which demonstrates this defensive disparity between the 2 QBs.  All rectangles in green are top 10 scoring Ds.  All rectangles in white are not.

v2drogkacobz.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Revel8 said:

 

It is pointless to talk about what if your D allowed 30+ pts, because most times your team will lose. Not mention high flying and quick strike offense is part of reasons the defense has bad games. Just imagine what if Pats offense had played only 26.5 min like Rodgers, not 37 min, Pats would have lost last SB.

Now, what if your defense allows 17 pts? what if your defense allows 20 pts? what if your defense allows 24 pts?  can your QB score enough to win?

Packers had such chances, multiple times.  Rodgers failed to score 24 pts.

There are plenty of good defenses in the league in last 15 years. If their QB could have score 21+ pts year in year out, they would have won lot of SB.

I take Rodgers stats with a grain of salt, sorry, because he had good QBR even in lousy games, like 92 against Falcons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You people just don't believe me. High flying offense (without good running games) almost guarantees loss in playoff.

In 2007, Belichick changed Pats offense system, turned Brady's "taking what is given" to a high flying offense, like Peytons.

Results? Defense got worse and worse, would have allowed 350+ pts routinely if Pats were in NFC and among the lower half in the league.

Offense? 2010, 2011, 2012, 3 consecutive years of 500+ pts, in 2013 they would have scored 500+ pts again if Gronks were not out in the middle of the season.  Playoff? struggled to score 20 pts, even against Jets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Revel8 said:

According to those numbers, the rate at which the Patriots play their Probable and Questionable players is higher.  Though these numbers aren't even relevant to this discussion in the first place.

So are the teams that have higher percentages than the Patriots also cheaters? How are these numbers not relevant, because they don't support your claim in which you've listed zero evidence to support.

 

CLAIM: The Patriots have cheated on the IR much more than any other team over the past 15 years and there is demonstrative proof that shows this.

 

EVIDENCE: Single off-season where disgruntled ex players say the Patriots have their way of doing the IR. One which said he was in fact injured, they just said it was a hip and not hamstring. And the other saying he was put on IR as punishment. Neither of which give the Patriots any competitive advantage.

4 hours ago, Revel8 said:

I've done this multiple times already.  Each time you ignore it.  As was said before, when you don't want to see something, you disavow all evidence.  We see this in science often.

Again, you made a claim of cheating that spans 15 years, and haven't given any actual evidence that shows it.

One off-season where one player felt unappreciated, and the other described being in New England as "4 years a slave", isn't exactly the solid reliable source that goes along with real evidence.

 

But like I said, lets go ahead and agree they did that. That is a single off-season, one that was investigated and no fines or warning handed down. One in which other teams have been caught and fined/warned about IR violations.

 

For the final time....If their cheating is overwhelmingly obvious to you, why has not a single infraction been found by the league pertaining to the Patriots and the IR.

 

You are the one making the claim....you are the one that has to present evidence to back it up. That's how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Revel8 said:

A good OLine isn't a requirement for Rodgers like it is for Brady.  When the pocket collapses, he escapes and creates time for his receivers to get open.  

You're severely underrating Rodgers, severely overrating Brady, or both.  Rodgers has historically outperformed Brady statistically in the playoffs.

Playoff Stat—–Rodgers—Brady
QB Rating———–99.4——–89.0
Completion %-—63.5%——62.7%
PPG———---——28.75———26.7
YPA—————---—7.5———–6.9
TD %————---—-6.0%——–4.8%
INT %———---——1.7%——–2.3%

 

Rodgers has played in half the playoff games Brady has...Brady also played 6 playoff games (1/3 of Rodgers total), before the rule changes that saw passing statistics rise throughout the league. Both of these factors are significant when talking about averages.

Brady has also faced better playoff defenses on average when you look at DVOA (which is better than PPG). Brady - 10.8   /   Rodgers - 12.9

Rodgers is a fantastic QB, but you've been doing the same exact thing you're accusing (and rightly so) of ZTOA doing, downplaying one QB and/or propping up another.

The Brady relying on a good OL statement shows you don't watch many Patriots games. He has made his OL look much better than they actually are several seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...